[Community-acquired Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia: 17 years of experience in Argentine children].

Servicio de Control Epidemiológico e Infectología, Hospital Nacional de Pediatría Prof. Dr. Juan P. Garrahan.
Archivos argentinos de pediatría (Impact Factor: 0.37). 08/2010; 108(4):311-7. DOI: 10.1590/S0325-00752010000400004
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Community-acquired methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (CAMRSa) emerged in recent years. Few studies analyzed the impact of these infections in bacteremias (B).
To analyze clinical, epidemiological, microbiological and outcome of CASa B between two periods (Period I: 1993-2004, and Period II: 2004-2007).
Retrospective, observational and comparative study. All children older than 1 month of age and CASaB were included.
During the study period 647 SaB were diagnosed (Period I: 499 and Period II: 148). Of them, 140 (28%) and 49 (33%) were CSaB, respectively. The median age of patients was 5.9 and 4.8 years, respectively (p= NS). Clinical foci of infection and septic shock were more frequent in the period I (78% vs. 47%) and (5% vs. 16%) (p <0.05), respectively. Skin infection and septic shock were similar in both periods (78% vs. 67% and 5% vs. 8%; p= NS). Four CAMRSa B (3%) were diagnosed during the first period. One predisposing factor was identified in all cases. Inversely, 23 cases (47%) were diagnosed during the Period II (p <0.05). Resistance rates to clindamycin and gentamicin were more high during the second period (10% vs. 2% and 20% vs. 3%, respectively) (p <0.05). Patients in the second period had longer antibiotic treatment (X 16.6 vs. 10.1 days) and more frequent inappropriate treatment at admission (53% vs. 5%) (p <0.05). Hospital stay time was longer during de first period (19.2 vs. 12.2 days) (p <0.05). The mortality rate was higher in the first period (13% vs. 4%) (p= NS).
A significant increase of CAMRSa B were detected in recent years. It is necessary to evaluate the empirical treatment of severe community infections in children in our country.

Download full-text


Available from: Maria Teresa Rosanova, Nov 12, 2014
1 Follower
78 Reads
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: La celulitis orbitaria es una patología del niño mayor y raramente compromete al período neonatal. Staphylococcus aureus (SA) es el principal agente etiológico relacionado. El diagnóstico precoz y el tratamiento adecuado mejoran el pronóstico. Se presentan tres recién nacidos con celulitis orbitaria por SA meticilinorresistente de la comunidad (SAMR-CO).
    Archivos argentinos de pediatría 02/2012; 110(1):e9-e12. DOI:10.5546/aap.2011.e9 · 0.37 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia (SAB) is an important infection with an incidence rate ranging from 20 to 50 cases/100,000 population per year. Between 10% and 30% of these patients will die from SAB. Comparatively, this accounts for a greater number of deaths than for AIDS, tuberculosis, and viral hepatitis combined. Multiple factors influence outcomes for SAB patients. The most consistent predictor of mortality is age, with older patients being twice as likely to die. Except for the presence of comorbidities, the impacts of other host factors, including gender, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and immune status, are unclear. Pathogen-host interactions, especially the presence of shock and the source of SAB, are strong predictors of outcomes. Although antibiotic resistance may be associated with increased mortality, questions remain as to whether this reflects pathogen-specific factors or poorer responses to antibiotic therapy, namely, vancomycin. Optimal management relies on starting appropriate antibiotics in a timely fashion, resulting in improved outcomes for certain patient subgroups. The roles of surgery and infectious disease consultations require further study. Although the rate of mortality from SAB is declining, it remains high. Future international collaborative studies are required to tease out the relative contributions of various factors to mortality, which would enable the optimization of SAB management and patient outcomes.
    Clinical microbiology reviews 04/2012; 25(2):362-86. DOI:10.1128/CMR.05022-11 · 17.41 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE: To provide an update to the "Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines for Management of Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock," last published in 2008. DESIGN: A consensus committee of 68 international experts representing 30 international organizations was convened. Nominal groups were assembled at key international meetings (for those committee members attending the conference). A formal conflict of interest policy was developed at the onset of the process and enforced throughout. The entire guidelines process was conducted independent of any industry funding. A stand-alone meeting was held for all subgroup heads, co- and vice-chairs, and selected individuals. Teleconferences and electronic-based discussion among subgroups and among the entire committee served as an integral part of the development. METHODS: The authors were advised to follow the principles of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system to guide assessment of quality of evidence from high (A) to very low (D) and to determine the strength of recommendations as strong (1) or weak (2). The potential drawbacks of making strong recommendations in the presence of low-quality evidence were emphasized. Recommendations were classified into three groups: (1) those directly targeting severe sepsis; (2) those targeting general care of the critically ill patient and considered high priority in severe sepsis; and (3) pediatric considerations. RESULTS: Key recommendations and suggestions, listed by category, include: early quantitative resuscitation of the septic patient during the first 6 h after recognition (1C); blood cultures before antibiotic therapy (1C); imaging studies performed promptly to confirm a potential source of infection (UG); administration of broad-spectrum antimicrobials therapy within 1 h of the recognition of septic shock (1B) and severe sepsis without septic shock (1C) as the goal of therapy; reassessment of antimicrobial therapy daily for de-escalation, when appropriate (1B); infection source control with attention to the balance of risks and benefits of the chosen method within 12 h of diagnosis (1C); initial fluid resuscitation with crystalloid (1B) and consideration of the addition of albumin in patients who continue to require substantial amounts of crystalloid to maintain adequate mean arterial pressure (2C) and the avoidance of hetastarch formulations (1B); initial fluid challenge in patients with sepsis-induced tissue hypoperfusion and suspicion of hypovolemia to achieve a minimum of 30 mL/kg of crystalloids (more rapid administration and greater amounts of fluid may be needed in some patients (1C); fluid challenge technique continued as long as hemodynamic improvement is based on either dynamic or static variables (UG); norepinephrine as the first-choice vasopressor to maintain mean arterial pressure ≥65 mmHg (1B); epinephrine when an additional agent is needed to maintain adequate blood pressure (2B); vasopressin (0.03 U/min) can be added to norepinephrine to either raise mean arterial pressure to target or to decrease norepinephrine dose but should not be used as the initial vasopressor (UG); dopamine is not recommended except in highly selected circumstances (2C); dobutamine infusion administered or added to vasopressor in the presence of (a) myocardial dysfunction as suggested by elevated cardiac filling pressures and low cardiac output, or (b) ongoing signs of hypoperfusion despite achieving adequate intravascular volume and adequate mean arterial pressure (1C); avoiding use of intravenous hydrocortisone in adult septic shock patients if adequate fluid resuscitation and vasopressor therapy are able to restore hemodynamic stability (2C); hemoglobin target of 7-9 g/dL in the absence of tissue hypoperfusion, ischemic coronary artery disease, or acute hemorrhage (1B); low tidal volume (1A) and limitation of inspiratory plateau pressure (1B) for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS); application of at least a minimal amount of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) in ARDS (1B); higher rather than lower level of PEEP for patients with sepsis-induced moderate or severe ARDS (2C); recruitment maneuvers in sepsis patients with severe refractory hypoxemia due to ARDS (2C); prone positioning in sepsis-induced ARDS patients with a PaO (2)/FiO (2) ratio of ≤100 mm Hg in facilities that have experience with such practices (2C); head-of-bed elevation in mechanically ventilated patients unless contraindicated (1B); a conservative fluid strategy for patients with established ARDS who do not have evidence of tissue hypoperfusion (1C); protocols for weaning and sedation (1A); minimizing use of either intermittent bolus sedation or continuous infusion sedation targeting specific titration endpoints (1B); avoidance of neuromuscular blockers if possible in the septic patient without ARDS (1C); a short course of neuromuscular blocker (no longer than 48 h) for patients with early ARDS and a PaO (2)/FI O (2) <150 mm Hg (2C); a protocolized approach to blood glucose management commencing insulin dosing when two consecutive blood glucose levels are >180 mg/dL, targeting an upper blood glucose ≤180 mg/dL (1A); equivalency of continuous veno-venous hemofiltration or intermittent hemodialysis (2B); prophylaxis for deep vein thrombosis (1B); use of stress ulcer prophylaxis to prevent upper gastrointestinal bleeding in patients with bleeding risk factors (1B); oral or enteral (if necessary) feedings, as tolerated, rather than either complete fasting or provision of only intravenous glucose within the first 48 h after a diagnosis of severe sepsis/septic shock (2C); and addressing goals of care, including treatment plans and end-of-life planning (as appropriate) (1B), as early as feasible, but within 72 h of intensive care unit admission (2C). Recommendations specific to pediatric severe sepsis include: therapy with face mask oxygen, high flow nasal cannula oxygen, or nasopharyngeal continuous PEEP in the presence of respiratory distress and hypoxemia (2C), use of physical examination therapeutic endpoints such as capillary refill (2C); for septic shock associated with hypovolemia, the use of crystalloids or albumin to deliver a bolus of 20 mL/kg of crystalloids (or albumin equivalent) over 5-10 min (2C); more common use of inotropes and vasodilators for low cardiac output septic shock associated with elevated systemic vascular resistance (2C); and use of hydrocortisone only in children with suspected or proven "absolute"' adrenal insufficiency (2C). CONCLUSIONS: Strong agreement existed among a large cohort of international experts regarding many level 1 recommendations for the best care of patients with severe sepsis. Although a significant number of aspects of care have relatively weak support, evidence-based recommendations regarding the acute management of sepsis and septic shock are the foundation of improved outcomes for this important group of critically ill patients.
    Intensive Care Medicine 01/2013; 39(2). DOI:10.1007/s00134-012-2769-8 · 7.21 Impact Factor
Show more